* [Bug fortran/45186] [4.6 Regression] Gfortran 4.5.0 emits wrong linenumbers
2010-08-04 21:02 [Bug fortran/45186] New: " nikolay at totalviewtech dot com
@ 2010-08-17 9:26 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-08-17 14:59 ` jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk
` (11 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-08-17 9:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #11 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-17 09:25 -------
Should be fixed for 4.5.2, 4.6 will use a different approach.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|[4.5/4.6 Regression] |[4.6 Regression] Gfortran
|Gfortran 4.5.0 emits wrong |4.5.0 emits wrong
|linenumbers |linenumbers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45186
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/45186] [4.6 Regression] Gfortran 4.5.0 emits wrong linenumbers
2010-08-04 21:02 [Bug fortran/45186] New: " nikolay at totalviewtech dot com
2010-08-17 9:26 ` [Bug fortran/45186] [4.6 Regression] " jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-08-17 14:59 ` jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk
2010-09-02 11:15 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk @ 2010-08-17 14:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|4.5.2 |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45186
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/45186] [4.6 Regression] Gfortran 4.5.0 emits wrong linenumbers
2010-08-04 21:02 [Bug fortran/45186] New: " nikolay at totalviewtech dot com
2010-08-17 9:26 ` [Bug fortran/45186] [4.6 Regression] " jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-08-17 14:59 ` jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk
@ 2010-09-02 11:15 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-09-02 14:04 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-09-02 11:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45186
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/45186] [4.6 Regression] Gfortran 4.5.0 emits wrong linenumbers
2010-08-04 21:02 [Bug fortran/45186] New: " nikolay at totalviewtech dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2010-09-02 11:15 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-09-02 14:04 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-09-03 19:41 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-09-02 14:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #12 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-02 14:04 -------
Subject: Bug 45186
Author: burnus
Date: Thu Sep 2 14:04:06 2010
New Revision: 163776
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=163776
Log:
2010-09-02 Tobias Burnus <burnus@net-b.de>
PR fortran/45186
* trans-common.c (create_common): Change build[0-9] to
build[0-9]_loc.
* trans-const.c (gfc_conv_constant_to_tree,
gfc_conv_constant_to_tree): Ditto.
* trans-decl.c (gfc_build_qualified_array, build_entry_thunks,
gfc_get_fake_result_decl, gfc_trans_auto_character_variable,
add_argument_checking, create_main_function,
gfc_generate_return): Ditto.
* trans-types.c (gfc_get_dtype, gfc_get_array_type_bounds):
* Ditto.
* trans-stmt.c (allocate_temp_for_forall_nest_1,
compute_inner_temp_size, compute_overall_iter_number,
generate_loop_for_rhs_to_temp, generate_loop_for_temp_to_lhs,
gfc_conv_elemental_dependencies, gfc_do_allocate,
gfc_evaluate_where_mask, gfc_trans_allocate,
gfc_trans_arithmetic_if, gfc_trans_call,
gfc_trans_character_select, gfc_trans_deallocate,
gfc_trans_do, gfc_trans_do_while, gfc_trans_forall_1,
gfc_trans_forall_loop, gfc_trans_goto, gfc_trans_if_1,
gfc_trans_integer_select, gfc_trans_logical_select,
gfc_trans_pointer_assign_need_temp, gfc_trans_return,
gfc_trans_simple_do, gfc_trans_sync, gfc_trans_where_2,
gfc_trans_where_assign) Ditto.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-common.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-const.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-types.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45186
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/45186] [4.6 Regression] Gfortran 4.5.0 emits wrong linenumbers
2010-08-04 21:02 [Bug fortran/45186] New: " nikolay at totalviewtech dot com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2010-09-02 14:04 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-09-03 19:41 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-09-05 18:10 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-09-03 19:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #13 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-03 19:41 -------
Subject: Bug 45186
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Sep 3 19:41:11 2010
New Revision: 163838
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=163838
Log:
2010-09-03 Tobias Burnus <burnus@net-b.de>
PR fortran/45186
* trans-intrinsic.c (gfc_conv_intrinsic_sign,
gfc_conv_intrinsic_leadz): Use build_call_expr_loc instead
of build_call_expr.
* trans-expr.c (gfc_conv_expr_present, gfc_conv_missing_dummy,
gfc_conv_string_length, gfc_conv_substring,
gfc_conv_component_ref, gfc_conv_unary_op, gfc_conv_powi,
gfc_conv_cst_int_power, gfc_conv_string_tmp, gfc_conv_concat_op,
gfc_conv_expr_op, gfc_build_compare_string,
gfc_set_interface_mapping_bounds, gfc_conv_subref_array_arg,
gfc_conv_derived_to_class, conv_isocbinding_procedure,
gfc_conv_procedure_call, fill_with_spaces,
gfc_trans_string_copy, gfc_trans_alloc_subarray_assign,
gfc_trans_structure_assign, gfc_trans_pointer_assignment,
gfc_trans_scalar_assign, gfc_trans_zero_assign,
gfc_trans_array_copy, gfc_trans_array_constructor_copy): Change
fold_build[0-9] to fold_build[0-9]_loc.
* trans-io.c (set_parameter_const, set_parameter_value,
set_parameter_ref, gfc_convert_array_to_string, set_string,
set_internal_unit, io_result, set_error_locus,
nml_get_addr_expr, build_dt): Ditto.
* trans-openmp.c (gfc_omp_clause_default_ctor,
gfc_omp_clause_copy_ctor, gfc_omp_clause_assign_op,
gfc_trans_omp_array_reduction, gfc_trans_omp_atomic,
gfc_trans_omp_do): Ditto.
* trans.c (gfc_add_modify, gfc_build_addr_expr,
gfc_build_array_ref, gfc_trans_runtime_error_vararg,
gfc_trans_runtime_check, gfc_call_malloc,
gfc_allocate_with_status, gfc_allocate_array_with_status,
gfc_call_free, gfc_deallocate_with_status,
gfc_call_realloc): Ditto.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-io.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-openmp.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45186
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/45186] [4.6 Regression] Gfortran 4.5.0 emits wrong linenumbers
2010-08-04 21:02 [Bug fortran/45186] New: " nikolay at totalviewtech dot com
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2010-09-03 19:41 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-09-05 18:10 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-09-07 11:38 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-09-05 18:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #14 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-05 18:10 -------
Subject: Bug 45186
Author: burnus
Date: Sun Sep 5 18:10:11 2010
New Revision: 163879
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=163879
Log:
2010-09-05 Tobias Burnus <burnus@net-b.de>
PR fortran/45186
* trans-intrinsic.c (gfc_conv_intrinsic_sign,
gfc_conv_intrinsic_leadz): Use build_call_expr_loc instead
of build_call_expr.
* trans-expr.c (gfc_conv_expr_present, gfc_conv_missing_dummy,
gfc_conv_string_length, gfc_conv_substring,
gfc_conv_component_ref, gfc_conv_unary_op, gfc_conv_powi,
gfc_conv_cst_int_power, gfc_conv_string_tmp, gfc_conv_concat_op,
gfc_conv_expr_op, gfc_build_compare_string,
gfc_set_interface_mapping_bounds, gfc_conv_subref_array_arg,
gfc_conv_derived_to_class, conv_isocbinding_procedure,
gfc_conv_procedure_call, fill_with_spaces,
gfc_trans_string_copy, gfc_trans_alloc_subarray_assign,
gfc_trans_structure_assign, gfc_trans_pointer_assignment,
gfc_trans_scalar_assign, gfc_trans_zero_assign,
gfc_trans_array_copy, gfc_trans_array_constructor_copy): Change
fold_build[0-9] to fold_build[0-9]_loc.
* trans-io.c (set_parameter_const, set_parameter_value,
set_parameter_ref, gfc_convert_array_to_string, set_string,
set_internal_unit, io_result, set_error_locus,
nml_get_addr_expr, build_dt): Ditto.
* trans-openmp.c (gfc_omp_clause_default_ctor,
gfc_omp_clause_copy_ctor, gfc_omp_clause_assign_op,
gfc_trans_omp_array_reduction, gfc_trans_omp_atomic,
gfc_trans_omp_do): Ditto.
* trans.c (gfc_add_modify, gfc_build_addr_expr,
gfc_build_array_ref, gfc_trans_runtime_error_vararg,
gfc_trans_runtime_check, gfc_call_malloc,
gfc_allocate_with_status, gfc_allocate_array_with_status,
gfc_call_free, gfc_deallocate_with_status,
gfc_call_realloc): Ditto.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/fortran/convert.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/f95-lang.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45186
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/45186] [4.6 Regression] Gfortran 4.5.0 emits wrong linenumbers
2010-08-04 21:02 [Bug fortran/45186] New: " nikolay at totalviewtech dot com
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2010-09-05 18:10 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-09-07 11:38 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-09-07 15:32 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-09-07 11:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #15 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-07 11:37 -------
Created an attachment (id=21725)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21725&action=view)
tree.h patch tp add build[0-9]_loc
(In reply to comment #9)
> grep -w build[0-9] trans*.c | wc -l
> 38
> grep -w build[0-9]_v trans*.c | wc -l
> 158
That part requires the attached patch to add build[0-9]_loc to gcc/tree.h. The
patch still needs to be build with all languages - and then "make -k check"
regtested ...
> grep -w fold_build[0-9] trans*.c | wc -l
> 734
That's now down to
trans-array.c:198
and down to 117 in my local tree.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45186
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/45186] [4.6 Regression] Gfortran 4.5.0 emits wrong linenumbers
2010-08-04 21:02 [Bug fortran/45186] New: " nikolay at totalviewtech dot com
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2010-09-07 11:38 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-09-07 15:32 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-09-07 19:04 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-09-07 15:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #16 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-07 15:29 -------
(In reply to comment #15)
> Created an attachment (id=21725)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21725&action=view) [edit]
+#define build6_loc(l,c,t1,t2,t3,t4,t5,t6,t7) \
+ build1_stat_loc (l,c,t1,t2,t3,t4,t5,t6,t7 MEM_STAT_INFO)
The last line should use -6- and not -1-, i.e. build1_stat_loc ->
build6_stat_loc
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45186
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/45186] [4.6 Regression] Gfortran 4.5.0 emits wrong linenumbers
2010-08-04 21:02 [Bug fortran/45186] New: " nikolay at totalviewtech dot com
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2010-09-07 15:32 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-09-07 19:04 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-09-09 19:33 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-09-07 19:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #17 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-07 19:03 -------
Subject: Bug 45186
Author: burnus
Date: Tue Sep 7 19:03:41 2010
New Revision: 163964
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=163964
Log:
2010-09-07 Tobias Burnus <burnus@net-b.de>
PR fortran/45186
* trans-array.c (gfc_conv_descriptor_data_get,
gfc_conv_descriptor_data_set, gfc_conv_descriptor_data_addr,
gfc_conv_descriptor_offset, gfc_conv_descriptor_dtype,
gfc_conv_descriptor_dimension, gfc_conv_descriptor_stride,
gfc_conv_descriptor_lbound, gfc_conv_descriptor_ubound,
gfc_conv_shift_descriptor_lbound,
gfc_set_loop_bounds_from_array_spec,
gfc_trans_allocate_array_storage, gfc_trans_create_temp_array,
gfc_conv_array_transpose, gfc_get_iteration_count,
gfc_grow_array, gfc_trans_array_ctor_element,
gfc_trans_array_constructor_subarray,
gfc_trans_array_constructor_value,
constant_array_constructor_loop_size,
gfc_trans_array_constructor,
gfc_set_vector_loop_bounds, gfc_trans_array_bound_check,
gfc_conv_array_index_offset, gfc_conv_scalarized_array_ref,
gfc_conv_array_ref, gfc_trans_preloop_setup,
gfc_trans_scalarized_loop_end, gfc_conv_ss_startstride,
gfc_conv_loop_setup, gfc_conv_array_extent_dim,
gfc_conv_descriptor_size, gfc_array_init_size,
gfc_array_allocate, gfc_array_deallocate,
gfc_trans_array_bounds, gfc_trans_auto_array_allocation,
gfc_trans_dummy_array_bias, gfc_get_dataptr_offset,
get_array_charlen, gfc_conv_expr_descriptor,
array_parameter_size, gfc_conv_array_parameter,
gfc_trans_dealloc_allocated, get_full_array_size,
duplicate_allocatable,
structure_alloc_comps): Change fold_build[0-9] to
fold_build[0-9]_loc.
(duplicate_allocatable, structure_alloc_comps,
gfc_duplicate_allocatable): Add space after function name.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45186
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/45186] [4.6 Regression] Gfortran 4.5.0 emits wrong linenumbers
2010-08-04 21:02 [Bug fortran/45186] New: " nikolay at totalviewtech dot com
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2010-09-07 19:04 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-09-09 19:33 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-09-10 6:02 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-09-09 19:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #18 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-09 19:33 -------
(In reply to comment #0)
> This is pretty widespread. I have attached one example
That's now mostly fixed - though one patch is pending. Now
gfortran -fdump-tree-original-lineno
generates mostly sensible line numbers.
For the given example, only for the DO loop the line numbers are a bit counter
intuitive, given the line numbers
14 do i = 1,10
15 array1(i) = i
16 end do
the dump of the internal representation (shown in a C-like syntax) is:
[debug.f90 : 14] i = 1;
[debug.f90 : 15] if ([debug.f90 : 15] i <= 10)
...
[debug.f90 : 15] array1[[debug.f90 : 15] (integer(kind=8)) i + -1] =
i;
L.1:;
[debug.f90 : 15] D.1577 = [debug.f90 : 15] i == 10;
[debug.f90 : 15] i = [debug.f90 : 15] i + 1;
[debug.f90 : 15] if (D.1577) goto L.2;
The "i = 1" is in the expected line - as is the "array1(i) = i" assignment, but
the loop increment and the exit conditions I would expect in line 14 and not in
line 15.
If no one else does, I will have a look after the last "input_location" patch
has been committed. I expect that there are more cases where the annotation is
slightly misplaced.
If one looks at GCC 4.4, one finds:
[debug.f90 : 14] i = 1;
[debug.f90 : 14] if (i <= 10)
[debug.f90 : 15] array1[(integer(kind=8)) i + -1] = i;
L.1:;
D.1550 = i == 10;
i = i + 1;
if (D.1550) goto L.2;
Thus, the first loop condition is in the proper line (14) while there is no
line number associated with the loop increment and the exit condition.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45186
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/45186] [4.6 Regression] Gfortran 4.5.0 emits wrong linenumbers
2010-08-04 21:02 [Bug fortran/45186] New: " nikolay at totalviewtech dot com
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2010-09-09 19:33 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-09-10 6:02 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-09-10 6:36 ` jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk
2010-09-10 7:25 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-09-10 6:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #19 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-10 06:02 -------
Subject: Bug 45186
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Sep 10 06:01:50 2010
New Revision: 164143
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164143
Log:
2010-09-10 Tobias Burnus <burnus@net-b.de>
PR fortran/45186
* trans.h (build1_stat_loc, build2_stat_loc, build3_stat_loc,
build4_stat_loc): New inline functions.
(build1_loc, build2_loc, build3_loc, build4_loc): New macros.
(build1_v, build2_v, build3_v, build4_v): Use input_location
as locus.
* trans-array.c (gfc_trans_scalarized_loop_end,
gfc_conv_array_parameter): Replace build[1-4] by build[1-4]_loc.
* trans.c (gfc_build_addr_expr, gfc_build_array_ref,
gfc_finish_wrapped_block): Ditto.
* trans-decl.c (gfc_init_default_dt, init_intent_out_dt): Ditto.
* trans-expr.c (gfc_conv_missing_dummy,
gfc_trans_alloc_subarray_assign, gfc_trans_zero_assign): Ditto.
* trans-openmp.c (gfc_omp_clause_default_ctor,
gfc_trans_omp_critical, gfc_trans_omp_parallel,
gfc_trans_omp_parallel_do, gfc_trans_omp_parallel_sections,
gfc_trans_omp_parallel_workshare, gfc_trans_omp_sections
gfc_trans_omp_single, gfc_trans_omp_task,
gfc_trans_omp_workshare): Ditto.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-openmp.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans.h
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45186
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/45186] [4.6 Regression] Gfortran 4.5.0 emits wrong linenumbers
2010-08-04 21:02 [Bug fortran/45186] New: " nikolay at totalviewtech dot com
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2010-09-10 6:02 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-09-10 6:36 ` jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk
2010-09-10 7:25 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk @ 2010-09-10 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #20 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2010-09-10 06:36 -------
Tobias,
many thanks for working on this... I mentioned this before in the PR, but it
would be very good if some line number testcases were added to the regression
tests. Both for performance measurements and debugging, this is essential info,
and it is too remarkable good lineno info could 'disappear' from a released
(4.5) compiler just like that.
If there would be some semi-automatic way of checking the lineno quality (such
as e.g. in the original dump line numbers should always increase??), I'd be
happy to give it a try on CP2K.
Joost
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45186
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/45186] [4.6 Regression] Gfortran 4.5.0 emits wrong linenumbers
2010-08-04 21:02 [Bug fortran/45186] New: " nikolay at totalviewtech dot com
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2010-09-10 6:36 ` jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk
@ 2010-09-10 7:25 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-09-10 7:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #21 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-10 07:25 -------
(In reply to comment #20)
> many thanks for working on this... I mentioned this before in the PR, but it
> would be very good if some line number testcases were added to the regression
> tests.
I concur - with -dump-tree-original-lineno this should be possible.
> If there would be some semi-automatic way of checking the lineno quality (such
> as e.g. in the original dump line numbers should always increase??)
No! As the example in comment 18 shows the line numbers should not always
monotonically increase. Or at least I expect the "i = i + 1" to be associated
with the line
do i = 1, 10
rather than with the line
a(i) = b(i)
as the gfortran currently does. If you disagree, I can simply close this PR as
fixed ;-)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45186
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread